Who is God?

Sorry Jess but would you not agree that some people find it hard? I know several, mostly men (ducks from Gramps) who never admit they got anything wrong.

Thank you Granny 23 for your appreciative comment, and for seeing that I hoped that my experience may help others.

The date was around the late1940s (48) , and there were no counsellors to "talk you through it" then - you just got on with it ,or over it!
And JO4, If you insulted me(?) I don't recall it, but thanks for the apology. I don't take offence too easily. Life is too short and meant to be "enjoyed!

I've read most of the postings and was amazed and surprised at the amount of emotion that was aroused. And I didn't blame it on PMT!!

I really hope that any "wounds and bruises" are speedily forgotten and forgiven! Carrying vengeful thoughts only poisons ones self!

Thank you all for letting me use your Magazine , which I really enjoy.
Except when folks seem to be tearing at each others throats!
But then,after all. I'm just a bloke in a womans world!

For the Ladies - [flowers[

The poverty in China can be blamed on the government rather than on the superstition (ie Buddhism and Confucianism!!!) of the population. Then there are the examples of N Korea, Cambodia, Russia and Ukraine under the Stalinist regime, all strictly (aggressively) secular.

Oh, by the way, I don't believe religious belief and superstitious practices are the same. Religious belief and superstitious beliefs, maybe. Practices are quite apart from beliefs.

Can you tell me more about demythology, please, MiceElf. That's another term that is new to me.

Bags, I fully appreciate that for you and some others, holding a religious belief and superstitious practices are one and the same. But I don't share that view. Developed theologies have moved far beyond that place and demythologising happened a long time ago.

Sorry, spelled your name wrong, miceElf

True, micelf, but poverty in the States is nothing like poverty in many African countries, or South American ones. There is still masses of superstition in China even if the government is technically secular. By the way, the government in the Us is technically secualr as well, though it's hard to believe sometimes. More secular than our government, actually, at least in theory.

Thank you for saying that, jess. I thought so too but was too scared to say so.

I am not at all sure that that analogy holds. China is a completely secular state with appalling poverty, while in the USA there is a much greater affiliation of the
population to churches of all persuasions and descriptions. There is certainly greater inequality there than in some European states, but it's certainly 'the West'.

AL is on - you have done it again. That comment does sound as if you are having an indirect go at some unspecified person. This is a good example of why you get adverse reactions to some posts.
I hope this comment is helpful.

*Lilygran, it is true to say that humanism owes much to the Judaeo Christian tradition in Europe. As I humanist, I wouldn't deny it. I call myself a Christian Humanist because I accept the ethics of the New Testament but reject the metaphysics of religion. I think (but can't find the reference) that even Richard Dawkins would accept this.

You are quite right, lily, but I find the correlation between the increase in secularism in "the West" and the decrease in poverty interesting. In those places where religion still holds more sway there is still, in many if not most cases, massive poverty of the masses. It is only an observed correlation, admittedly.

vampireq some interpretations of mediaeval European society would suggest that the church hierarchy was modelled on that of society, not the other way round. And the church provided food and care for the poor, healing and care for the sick, education for all ranks of society and a path out of poverty for both sexes. Some bad things have been done in the name of the church, we don't need to misrepresent the rest of it.

Thank you JessM for your apology. I know some people find it hard to admit they may have made a mistake but you are not one of them.

The Church taught that things happened because God willed it. So if you were born a serf then that was because God had decided you were to be a serf and if you were born a king then again that was God's decision.

There was a simbiotic relationship between the secular and religious powers. The Church helped keep the king in power and the king rewarded the Church with lands and wealth.

Yes, Lilygran you are right. It's so difficult to develop a point in a few words. Indeed there are great themes running through the OT - the oppressed poor in slavery in Egypt, for example. But there are also some pretty horrific stories of vengeance and murder. It was a fundamentalist, literal interpretation, decontextualised, that I was attempting to point to in response to Mishap's comment.

Not sure what you mean by the last bit of your last post, MiceElf. Justice (whatever it's called) is such a strong theme in both the OT and the NT that I think it has to be taken as very important. Another different and interesting consideration is the extent to which the humanist views of many modern secularists have been influenced by the Christian tradition. Although I accept that 'Do as you would be done by' is pretty universal.

Posting politely and unambiguously is, it seems what we should be striving for if we do not wish to cause hurt, offence and discord.
I do apologise Alison if I completely misinterpreted your posts - I know it is hard sometimes to stop and re-read and see what others might be perceiving from one's words.
It is clear though that the virtues of humility and suffering have both been very strong themes in Christianity through the ages - so no reason why someone would not be putting forward such views on a thread about religion.

I certainly didn't want to suggest that the church has a monopoly of great ideas or aims. And indeed, all organisations are open to corruption by power seekers. However, I do not think that avoiding organisations, be it the church, a political party or voluntary organisation is the way to effect change. If one avoids becoming involved with organisations then it's possible to live ones own life well and according to one's principles, but it's only by organising and working together and collectively, that change happens.

For me, it's Liberation Theology and Feminist Theology (and a number of organisations such as Amnesty International, Mencap and Marie Curie) which enable me to move outside my own life and family and do my small bit to try, at least, to make the world a better place.

For those without a religious belief it will be other organisations and structures which give a shape and inspiration to their lives.

The OT of course is a collection of books consisting of chronicles, proverbs and poems, myths and so on which are the writings of a group of people living in the Middle East centuries ago. They can be, and are interpreted in many ways, but a fundamentalist reading is not helpful, I think.

Any organisation is corruptible. The fact that it is secular is no safeguard. And members of faith organisations or faith-supported ditto have some additional motivation in that they believe they are serving a higher power as well as their fellow humans.

bags I was accused of being the catalyst for all this unpleasantness by Jingl when I posted a mischievous quote, which with hindsight I ought to have acknowledged. Methinks the thread was destined to be explosive anyway, but heyho, my back is strong!

MiceElf - thank you for the references - liberation theology is to be applauded. But we must remember that its ideals are not only those of people of faith, and I am sure it was not your intention to imply that (I'm tiptoeing a bit here, given the delicate nature of the foregoing discussions!). Many non-denominational/theological organisations and people work for similar aims to the benefit of us all.

Whilst I would be the first to agree that many of the tenets of Christianity are (as I understand it) about compassion, equality and concern for the poor and needy, sadly all religions are open to corruption by power seekers and in general this appears to be what happens.

However there is much in the OT which is contrary to these ideals.

My own opinion is that (given that we can be sure about nothing when it comes to the big questions in life) there is merit in steering clear of these corruptible organisations and, as many have said, concentrating on the challenging task of living as decent and kind life as possible.

Well, yes, but I'm afraid I would need far more space than is possible or appropriate here. It is a theology which was articulated by a group of priests and poor in South America. Its starting point is the perception of scandals such as one billion persons living in absolute poverty, more with no access to basic medical care, illiteracy and more generally, collective oppression injustice and the denial of human rights. It was born when faith confronted the injustice done to the poor, that is, the collective poor and those exploited by the capitalist system, the unemployed, those pushed aside by the production process, the migrant workers and so on. It articulates the need to go beyond 'aid' and reformism which simply seeks improvement but always within existing social relationships and structures. Deep change of structures are necessary. This view is developed and transformed into political and social action. You may remember Archbishop Romero who was murdered at his altar by agents of the government. His 'crime' was to attempt to change structures.

If anyone is interested they might like to read

Introducing Liberation Theology by Leonardo and Clodovis Boff.

Never heard of Liberation Theology. Can you tell us more?